Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: cush11 Date: Dec 2, 2006 10:31am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Review Bias Compromise

Good idea. Some of the best shows I was at turned out to be some of the crappiest I've heard. I do like having both options, there are some good show related stories, but straight ahead reviews are very helpful too...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Dec 2, 2006 11:01am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Review Bias Compromise

A good point.

Ideally, the reviewer should listen back to the show he's reviewing even if he had already attended it.

I know the bulk of the shows I went to (and had a great time at, and loved while I was there) were from the years spanning 1985-1988, which i also objectively say is probably the worst, weakest run of Dead shows ever, outside of the '92-'95 death march period.

I think it's fine to note that you were there, but any review should be just that--a REVIEW--in the truest sense of the word. Take the time to go back, listen again, think beyind your memories of how fun it was at the time and give as honest and objective a review as possible.

Opinions of course will still differ, as so much is subjective. But if we're all honest we can differentiate between a show like Cornell '77 and some piece of crap from 1986.

I gave a review of the October 1983 at MSG I attended when they pulled out the Stephen for the first time in 5 years...now THAT should be metioned, even tho' it's not a performance review or sound quality review, and if someone is looking for a monster crowd reaction, there you go. But the fact is, as amazing as that show was to BE there, when you go back and listen, it wasn't very good. 3 stars at best, and the sound quality of the AUD is pretty weak. So noted. There were many other better shows in '83 (the following Hartford run bears that out), so I tried to base my review of the MSG show not on the grand time I had, which was 5 stars, but how the show will probably sound to others' ears--which is a 3.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jhender501 Date: Dec 2, 2006 11:04am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Review Bias Compromise

I like reading folk's experiences at shows or in the parking lots, etc..we all know that some of that stuff was just as much fun as the show itself.

I don't write flowing reviews that rival those of music critics..I wish I would write like the late Ralph J. Gleason who's reviews I used to read as a kid in the SF Chronicle.

Much of the time I'm listening to a show at work and don't have time to write a lengthy review but I certainly like to share my feelings on the show.


Jim

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)